Those that have followed my work, know that I am a big believer in the Benedict Option; or at least a revised version of it offered by Rob Drehe; one that is larger, more aggressive and outward facing. I am also a big fan of the monastic tradition of the Catholic Churches; which is something that on the whole is on its knees. One question I am often asked – is how can we get to the Benedict option; from where we are; and so I want to try and kill two birds with one stone; by outlining a path towards a Benedict Option that also might hol the key to saving the monastic tradition and breathing into it new life.
There are close to 70 monasteries and priories in the UK in the UK; if we restrict ourselves solely to counting the Roman Catholic tradition; this number will rise to close to two hundred when all Christian traditions are included (as an estimate) which at first glance sounds like robust health until you consider the ages of the average monastic: which is clearly over 60; and the fact that their are very few new entrants into these religious houses. So for instance, the Guardian reported in 2009 that:
” In 2000, there were about 710 nuns and 230 monks in Anglican religious orders in Britain and Ireland. Eight years later, numbers are down more than a third – to 470 nuns and 135 monks.
It is no better for Roman Catholic orders. The Vatican revealed last year that numbers worldwide fell 10% in 2005-06 alone. The Conference of Religious in England and Wales represents around 80% of Catholic communities, some 4,930 nuns and 1,320 monks. In 2007, just 13 men and 16 women became novices. Numbers have been declining steadily for at least 20 years and the average age of entrants is much higher.”
The Religious Houses have of course attempted to tackle this problem – and failed; they have tried taster sessions, advertising campaigns, documentaries, advertising, and yet many monastaries have not had a novice in the last ten years and most only have a handful of religious members.
It is clear that the writing is on the wall for the religious houses unless something radical is done; we can just stare like rabbits fixed in the lights of an oncoming car; the fate about to befall this tradition and do nothing; watching as it withers on the vine. Some will of course come out with pious babble about ‘GOD being in control’ (a fact for sure but often just used to silence intelligent and thoughtful discussion about complex issues. Alternatively we can try and think outside of the box; and try something different. So here is what I propose:
That these religious houses; open up their vast estates and rooms to those of us in the laity who want to live a communal life. That after such proper vetting to check suitability; which would cover religious commitment, understanding that its not a free ride, that they must work, and that are committed to the communal life; and will submit to certain a certain revised rule, in keeping with the spirit of the particular order; into whose estate they are moving. That lay communities move into and around the monasteries and convents of of the Churches. That they live a synergetic life of the monks; participating to a decided degree with the life of the Religious, whilst working their jobs; and being active members in society; a half way house. Now immediately, the knowledgeable reader will say – ‘arh, this has been tried before it is the idea of the oblates’; which for those of you that don’t know – was the idea of secular individuals, attaching themselves to a monastic community and living as closely as they could to the rule of the monastery; as a free will offering, on an individual basis. However, what I am proposing – whilst it does have over lap is very different in a number of way.
- Oblates are individuals who find their way to the monastic tradition of their chosen community. I am proposing not an individual movement – but a movement of hundreds, of people at a time.
- Oblates can live far away from the chosen community that they are committed to; I am proposing that all concerned move into the monastery itself; and around the monastery geographically.
- Oblates live their own life by the rule; but in my proposal; the community, lives its life synergistically with the monks.
So this is quite different; many religious houses have spare rooms, which could be given to single men or women; (depending on if its a monastery or convent) on rotation for a year, many religious houses have tracts of land into which accommodation could be built and many are close to towns, villages and cities, which could be consciously colonised over time; with the community working together to buy, keep, maintain and retain property. These communities would include families; whose children would be exposed to the lives of the monks; and the adults would take it in turn to participate with the monks / nuns in their lives. Individuals would participate more fully in the life of the religious if they were single. The community, would be outward facing ever evangelistic, recruiting more members to its community, increasing exposure to the monastic life. The monastics, would have a governing role of the life, culture, and economy of the community, but at arms length; not in a micromanaging fashion, peoples, families and jobs, and social life would be for the most part their own affair, except where they invited in the involvement of the religious or where something was proving so disruptive it necessitated their intervention.
The lay secular community, would have the role of generating the money; and with the monks deciding how that money would be spent, including creating industry for members of the community to work within. The religious would then be free to return to whatever their central charisms are; so if for instance it included manual work; like with the Benedictines, they would concentrate on all the manual needs of the community; such cleaning, repairing and cultivating the communal land. Passionists for instance – would find a ready made number of people – who are suffering with whom they can live their lives, right on their doorstep. The same would be true of a number of other orders; some, like the Cistercians, might find such an idea difficult; but with imagination, even this is not impossible.
The church needs to consolidate; in such a consolidation I believe the monastic movement of the western Church could be breathed new life; in an adaption; it would once again become the oasis of Christendom in a dessert of unbelief; a city on a hill; a light that shines in the darkness. Such communities; would then become the power houses of the local area; and seeking to Christianise all aspects of the local culture, society, and local economy, as well as the politics of the local area; it would then be able to amplify is way of life into the world. The churches need a healthy dose of ‘Dominion Theology’ but that is a separate argument. People raised in and around the religious would be more open to that vocation; I am confident more people would hear GOD call them to it. These settled communities would also give a semi permanent reservoir for the Religious to recruit from.
A new rule for the community would need to be constructed of course, and that should borrow from the rule of the religious community which is the centre of this community; however, a secular community does require a different rule, and so a serious borrowing from and thinking through, the lives of Amish and Bruderhof communities would be a great help. I therefore offer this sketch of such a rule a rule; to just try and get people (maybe an abbot or mother superior) thinking about the possibilities.
The communities could be confessional or ecumenical in nature; and as such those parts of spirituality common to all Christians could be adopted by the community as a whole; and certainly those not of a particular confession, who joins such a community, can be assumed to be open to a more general involvement and participation (otherwise how would they pass the vetting process). All members of the community, should be expected in good conscience to attend all acts of worship they could (children and those caring for them) being exempted except for Sunday worship, with men and women expected to alternate when they can to allow for mutual participation. All should adopt as much of the spirituality and emphasis on the Rule of the Order, as they can. Using the Benedictine rule this would look something like this; monks would adopt the full rule, those single men/women with living the monks in close quarters; would adopt nearly the full spiritual elements of the rule, exemptions shown by an * for singles and a ** for families and *** for singles and individuals (or at least a qualified adoption): so: Fear of God, Rejecting one’s own desires***, Obedience to a superior***, Patient endurance of hardship, Confessing one’s weaknesses*, Being content with one’s lot in life, Learning self-reproach and not blaming others, Following the common rule***., Practicing silence**, Avoiding frivolity**, Speaking simply and plainly, Adopting a humble posture.
No one in the community would be expected to remain their forever, though they would commit annually to stay on another year; and to give a years notice if they wanted to leave; completing what remained of their year if they wanted to leave, to help leave well; tidy up lose ends, and allow for an arrangement and smooth transition with a replacement. The other apsects of the rule like communal life, moderate living, hospitality could all be practiced to some degree by the lay community. However, obedience, to the Abbot like stability, would be qualified; to those areas of the shared life; and spiritual life, not secular life. A common purse of the community would be held in trust and run by a group of elders and monks, who would make decisions about where the resources of the community are spent, for the provisions of the community. All would work and pay into this common pot; and the monks, would pursue their charisms, within the community and abroad; as without needing to generate and income (as an obligation) because it is on their land the community resides and has its being. Communal businesses would eventually be established by the community in addition to private PAYE work and Self Employment. Just as monks are marked by a distinct dress; so the members of the lay community, could and should adopt a distinct dress, to mark them out from the world, and as a reminder of their ‘communal life and identity’. This community would have disciplines in place to maintain order; and courts to settle disputes if they could not be sorted by informal routes. Those who have committed grave sin, and show no real signs of repentance; could as a final act be excluded from the community, as the community would be the land lord for its members. Should a person choose to leave they are not entitled to the return of money or property; that they must dissolve into the common purse to enter or what they earn or buy whilst being a member; they would leave with a bare minimum to start a new life outside of the community (remember them working is assumed here). Lay communities between different religious houses could move between one another; not just to mix up the blood over the generations; but as a means of resolving difficulties, and cross fertilisation. Those born into the community, would have to leave it for a time, between 18 – 21; and then apply to join from outside – if they want to return. If members did not have a job, they would need to claim benefits; and to agree to do the assigned tasks needed to be done for the upkeep of the community, like for instance, helping the monks in the physical tasks that upkeep the community. A communal meal would be eaten together in so far as its possible; once a day that all or as many members as possible that would be expected to attend; usually a supper (as its simple easy and at the end of the day). Those with families would be housed in their own accommodation; but those who are single would be housed together, or with the monks or nuns. There would be communally scheduled leisure time and activities put on for all that can to participate in; education would preferably left to each family to decide; but if the community could it should run its own school. When the community is missing some kind of professional, say like a GP, or plumber, it would pay for the training of one its community, to become that which it needs, who when not working for the community, would work for others, to generate further income for the community. The community, would regularly participate in missionary work to the surrounding area and seek not only to convert people to the faith, but Christians to their community, celebrating all new arrivals with pomp ceremony and celebratory tone.
This is a sketch; obviously much needs fleshing out; but given the Christian community is in general retreat across the west – we need to rethink how we do things. I believe the consolidation of the people of GOD is one move we could make to tackle many of our systemic problems; and doing so around monastic communities, who often have the land and many of the resources already in place; is a way forward; as well as quite possibly reviving this dying Christian tradition; that has given so much to the birth of western civilisation.
